Four Wishes at the Top of My Wish List


Wishing is a futile attempt to change what is, was or will be . . . futile as it may be, sometimes it’s all we have! The
following four wishes have long resided at the top of my wish list.

1) Every medical professional knows the phrase: “Primum non nocere“; it’s a Latin phrase that means “first, do no harm“. The
application of this phrase to medicine is clarified in Wikipedia: “given an existing problem, it may be better NOT to do
something, or even to do nothing, than to risk causing more harm than good.” It reminds the health care provider that they
must consider the possible harm that any intervention might do.”

I WISH: the American legal system worked more like that! For the legal system the Latin phrase for the definition of a ‘crime’
might be: “ad nullum nocumentum proximo patriae” which loosely means: “do no harm to your country or to your fellow man.” If
you condense all of the law books in all of the law libraries this maxim is all that ‘should be’ left. That and
sensible definitions of “harm” is all that is needed! That phrase virtually defines all crime and, in fact, represents the antithesis of
crime. The perfect modern day example of a case where the application of this maxim, before the fact, would have spared hundreds of
lives is Attorney General Eric Holder’s Justice Department’s “Mexican gun running scandal.”

2) I WISH: Barack Hussain Obama had never been even considered as a candidate for the office of President of the United
States. My wish has nothing to do with race (I can think of many minority men and women who are well qualified to sit in the
Oval Office) or even because he is a closet socialist (even though that is a BIG strike against him) but because the personality,
wit and oratory skills that got him elected in the first place have fallen way short of making him competent to do the job of
president. No one of any race or gender who was as inexperienced as Obama should have even been allowed (by the Democratic
Party in this case) to even campaign for the presidency much less, to the discredit of the American public, wind up winning and
doing virtually anything HE wishes to American citizens, to the government and to the Constitution.

3) I WISH: “Conservative” politicians, judges and media ‘stars’ would stop preaching to us and understand that the rights
given to us by the Constitution are NOT subject to dilution by “Conservative” preferences or religious beliefs. Every American
citizen should be allowed to control his or her personal life without any level of government (or church) interference as long
as they are acting within the law (i.e., they are doing no harm to the country or to their fellow citizens) and paying
their FAIR share of taxes. Government intrusion into any citizen’s life on any other basis is simply an intolerable government

4) I WISH religious and social ‘thugs’: i.e., homophobes, bullies, racists and blowhard lecturers, along with some preachers,
would stop trying to divide our society into ‘competitive teams’: the ‘gays vs. the straights,’ the whites vs. the non-whites,
the religionists vs. the non-believer, etc., etc.  America is not the place for that kind of separatism! Worst of all, the
fundamentalists of religion and race continue to indoctrinate their children with their twisted views and obsessive fears.
That will never make our world a better place.

We are, and always will be, individuals who look different, act different, think different and react different from each other.
That is the essence of human nature! All the hate, disrespect and intolerance in the world will not change human nature, it
will only create gorges where there should be bridges. That, and it will waste our precious, limited time on this earth; time that
could be used to build and reinforce those conceptual bridges.

What will, however, make the world a better place is the simple “maxim” that was illustrated through, logical action
long before it was put into words by ancient philosophers: it is the “Golden Rule” (ref: “Golden Rule Chronology” at The Golden Rule has, through the many centuries, been acted on and stated in
different ways and it is often misrepresented as a Chistian pronciple but it’s concept as well as it’s practice predates Christianity
by approximately one million years.

A word to the devoutly religious: It may seem that I am, in some ways, insulting religion and religious people; that is not my
intention. People have every right to believe whatever they wish and apply those beliefs to their own lives as they wish — my
point is that America is a Republic based on democratic principles; it is not the Theocracy that Conservatives seem to wish for.
America is a place where EQUALITY is the very basis of public life. America is a place where a citizen can have any personal,
political or religious beliefs they choose; but it is also, by it’s very design, a place where a citizen or group or government
official CAN NOT reinterpret the Constitution to suit their personal beliefs. Believe what you choose but only DO what is
right, e.g., “ad nullum nocumentum proximo patriae”.

The Issue is “Choice” not Abortion


According to a CNN article this morning:

“A campaign flub by a Republican Senate candidate shifted the political focus Monday to abortion and women’s rights.”

The “flub” in question was a statement by Republican Congressman Todd Akin of Missouri who said in an interview that “legitimate rape” rarely resulted in pregnancy. Akin apparently does not believe in abortion, period, in any circumstance and was making a mindless argument to support his own personal opinion.

We obviously all have a right to our personal opinions but in Akin’s case, the case of an elected government official, he was obviously ignoring his oath to be a representative of all of the people in his district in Missouri. Akin was not speaking as a man who cares about his constituents or even one who is knowledgeable about human biology . . . no, for just that one moment his instincts as a Theocrat took over. In his mind, as in the minds of millions like him (unfortunately this includes the majority of Conservative Republicans), free will represents an impediment to a perfect world . . . a “perfect world” where the Christian Bible is the ONLY authority over mankind and those who do NOT believe in the inerrancy of that Bible must be forced by law to believe in it.

In general, people like Akin are not fit to serve in positions where they can influence laws; they are incapable of honoring their solemn oath of office which pledges them to “support and protect the Constitution”. To them, the Constitution is just another impediment to a complete Theocracy. There is, however, a “Bigger Picture” to consider.

In the landmark abortion case Roe v. Wade, the nine Justices of the Supreme Court using the 14th Amendment (the Due Process Clause) stated “a right to privacy ruled that all state and federal laws outlawing abortion were unconstitutional and therefore, since that time, because of this decision, abortion has been considered ‘the law of the land.'”

Constitutionally, abortion is not even a legitimate issue — it has been settled, it IS Constitutional and it IS the “law of the land.”

The sad fact is that abortion opponents are actually opposing a woman’s right to have complete autonomy over her own body. Right now a woman’s right to choose abortion is not in contention, except in the minds of people who feel that their personal religious position against abortion (and this IS strictly a religious issue) should stand against a woman’s personal rights as well as her Constitutional rights.

The Bigger Picture

Here I have made a case against abortion opponents serving in public office — it is, however, just an emotional argument — the legal argument is, at least for now, moot and untouchable by any candidate for public office. If, however, there is anyone out there who will allow his or her stance on abortion to sway his or her vote in November — forgive me for thinking you foolish!

In this upcoming November election there are far more important “fish to fry.”

There are the matters of our country’s: tattered economy; huge national debt; far too large unemployment rate; energy independence; our status as a Republic where the individual states are, in most matters, autonomous and, among many other issues; our standing in the world as a positive force against terrorists and other evils — which, as tasteless as it seems to many, is a central issue that effects our very survival as a nation.

Compared with these, an issue like abortion rights, an issue, I repeat, which has already been settled, is far too insignificant to effect an election for President of the United States.

In my mind at least, based on just the important issues, President Obama (who apparently supports a woman’s right to choose abortion) has already lost the November election.

No free choice in South Dakota (without government consent)


According to Politics Daily, South Dakota’s Republican Governor Dennis Daugaard has signed a bill that requires women who want an abortion in the state of South Dakota to wait three days — three days, that is, after being forced to receive “counseling” from a doctor (probably a government appointed doctor) and from an anti-abortion counselor. If the woman cannot be successfully brain-washed in three days, she is then apparently free to receive an abortion.

Governor Daugaard, after signing the bill, made this statement:

“I think everyone agrees with the goal of reducing abortion by encouraging consideration of other alternatives. I hope that women who are considering an abortion will use this three-day period to make good choices.”

“Good choices?” Since when is the government responsible for directing or judging our choices when no law is being broken? Doesn’t that sound a little too Orwellian?

Regardless of what Governor Daugaard and the other religious conservatives in the South Dakota capital “think,” the fact, according to Sarah Stoesz, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood in South Dakota. is: the majority of the people in South Dakota don’t agree!

“The voters of South Dakota, by resounding margins at the ballot box, TWICE have told their legislators that the decision to have an abortion is between a woman, her family and her doctor and that government should not intrude on that decision,” Ms. Stoesz said.

I couldn’t agree more! Neither the government nor the church should have any control whatsoever over the decision of a free individual to carry a baby to term or to terminate the pregnancy.

The bottom line is: anti-abortion sentiment is fueled by the Christian Religious Right and over the past two decades the Religious Right’s hold on our governments, and therefore on our lives, has continually grown stronger.

On a personal level, religious beliefs are wonderful but when those beliefs are forced on people by government fiat you may soon find yourself immersed in a burgeoning Theocracy.

I’m sure that the governor of South Dakota “thinks” that he is doing the right thing by circumventing the stated will of the people, but then so has every tyrant, dictator and religious fanatic in history.